BENEFIT rates could be cut in low-wage areas under moves being considered by the Government, it emerged yesterday.

The idea of regional benefit ­levels was dropped from the final text of a speech given by David Cameron.

The Prime Minister suggested radical change ranging from work preparation for mothers of three-year-olds to lower rates for long-term claimants and softer rules for those who have paid into the system to “reward” contributions made before they lost their jobs.

But his spokesman said the PM thought ministers should consider linking benefits to local wages in the way being considered for public sector pay.

The aim is to ensure no one is better off on benefit or in public sector jobs than if they worked in the private sector.

Soon after Mr Cameron gave his speech in Dartford, Kent, Employment Minister Chris Grayling told the Commons it was “sensible” for the PM to take up the idea of regional benefits, originally proposed by Labour.

Claimants in the poorer areas are likely to suffer

Labour former minister David Hanson said claimants in poorer areas are likely suffer.

Some Lib Dems are also likely to be wary but Downing Street denied the idea was cut from the speech at Nick Clegg’s behest.

Mr Cameron conceded that some of his ideas about tackling the “something for nothing” culture that so many voters resent could be introduced only if the ­Tories won the 2015 ­General ­Election. As we reported yesterday, he suggested removing the right of under-25s to housing benefit if they could live with their parents and limiting benefits for jobless ­people with more than three or four children. He attacked the unfair “mess” where the welfare state had gone from safety net to creating a ­“culture of entitlement” in which long-term claimants sometimes got more cash than working neighbours earned.

Mr Cameron suggested other ways both to save money on the £84billion a year cost of welfare for people of working age and spur people into seeking jobs.

They included breaking the link between benefit rises and inflation. Banning the wealthy from council homes and reducing the £20,000-a-year cap on housing support were possibilities.

New conditions could also be placed on benefit claimants, such as learning to read and write.

It was also time to ask if people should be banned from going on to benefit on leaving school.

Mr Cameron said he was keeping his 2010 pledge to protect pensioner benefits such as free travel and TV licences.

But Simon Walker, head of the Institute of Directors, said: “There can be no sacred cows, and means-testing such benefits should also be considered.”